Recommended Posts

At Swedish universities we automatically get 200 hours/term for 'competence development'. I'll look into the possibility of Niklas and I being able to use some of these hours each term for participation in the project. If (as I strongly suspect) this is OK, our participation will be largely 'funded' by Kalmar (in the cockeyed way that accountants work). (This is how I participated in Gothenburg, by the way.)

As regards workloads, etc, I feel that we should develop our ability to meet virtually (as I've said elsewhere). If we can have an hour-long meeting each month, to review progress, and if we are very clear about what is to be done, by whom and when, then there's a very good chance that we'll get into a virtuous circle of working together, and the people who do more won't become irritated by the people who do less (and vice versa!). In a situation like this, payment for work done, rather than a standard sum, irrespective of what gets done, is likely to be more acceptable to everyone.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Interests:I have been recently appointed Head of the English Department at the Spanish Lycée in Neuilly sur Seine (Paris). Formerly I was a Language and Humanities Consultant at the Teachers' Resource Centre of Alcorcon (Madrid). My specialty is and has been Foreign Language Teaching, English to be more precise. I was a member of the History E-Learning Project, in charge of providing resources and training to the teachers of this area of Madrid. In what concerns the Hostory E-Learning Project my main contribution with my knowledge of English Language Teaching was raising awareness of the main problems that history teaching may have in non-native students. Besides, extending knowledge of examples of good practice at a local, regional, national and international level in what concerns the teaching history in English in non-native environment was another area of deep interest.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I need to know the way to figure it out. By now I believe is about €250 per day. If you can let me know how to calculate I will give you a perfect sum.

Staff costs refer to any payment made to a person attached to a member organisation of the partnership or working on a regular or recurrent basis for the project (regardless of his or her status). Staff costs must be broken down into categories 1 to 4 of the International Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO). A list of the occupations included in each of these ISCO categories is given in Appendix A.

Staff costs will be calculated on the basis of the actual daily salary/fees of the employee/service provider, multiplied by the number of days to be spent on the project. This calculation may include, if necessary, all the normal charges paid by the employer, such as social security contributions and related costs, but must exclude any bonus, incentive and profit-sharing arrangements or running costs. Staff costs may not exceed the normal costs for each staff category in the country concerned. In any case, the maximum amounts provided in the Appendix B apply unless explicit explanation of using higher rates is provided when submitting the application.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Interests:I have been recently appointed Head of the English Department at the Spanish Lycée in Neuilly sur Seine (Paris). Formerly I was a Language and Humanities Consultant at the Teachers' Resource Centre of Alcorcon (Madrid). My specialty is and has been Foreign Language Teaching, English to be more precise. I was a member of the History E-Learning Project, in charge of providing resources and training to the teachers of this area of Madrid. In what concerns the Hostory E-Learning Project my main contribution with my knowledge of English Language Teaching was raising awareness of the main problems that history teaching may have in non-native students. Besides, extending knowledge of examples of good practice at a local, regional, national and international level in what concerns the teaching history in English in non-native environment was another area of deep interest.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The project has to based on trust. People can not do this for the money. I think that if you introduce performance based criteria you will really create the possibility of rensentment and bad feeling. You also have to create a political and legal mechanism to withhold payment and remove member institutions. Choose people to be in this project you respect and who won't let you down. If they do, too bad. The alternative is a bureaucratic headache.

e-Help was unusually successful. We get 60%, many get less. Institutions can contribute however you want them to contribute. Administatively, the easiest thing is to designate all the labour costs as the participating institutions contributions. If your labour costs are high enough they should be greater than the required contributions from participant institutions. This will allow you to make cash payments to the participant institutions. This what I was able to manipulate with e-Help. This leaves your grant to spend as you like.

Richard, I assume the main way that institutions contribute is by allowing members to attend meetings in their time.

Partly. This is staff costs in general. This is why you e-Helpers had to fill out 'time sheets'. Your institutions pay you for your time on the project and claim it back. In theory at least.

Sorry I didn't join the forum before but I am just finishing two Leonardo Mobility Application Forms (deadline 10th February).

I agree wuth Richard: I do not think we can calculate exactly how many days each of us will be working, but if we keep it on an egalitarian basis for the moment and also include some mechanism to check people's work at some deadlines and withhold payments, etc. it should work.

In the end successful projects are based on trust.

I also agree about the method of considering participating institutions contributions as labour costs (unfortunately, this is not good for teachers, of course).

But labour costs should be anyway greater than the required contributions from participant institutions.

"This will allow you to make cash payments to the participant institutions. "

In my experience of European projects, this is what most institutions do. In my country each project has to be approved by the teachers' assembly. For each project there is a form which defines it in terms of objectives , results, etc, and a budget form with all the costs (staff, equipment, etc) and funding either from the institution budget or from any other source.

The project coordinator is responsible for it, in agreement with the principal, of course.

(Nice to have a look at the ISCO Table, I didn't know Italian managers are supposed to be the best paid in Europe, more than in any other country, a little more than Italian teachers, of course .......... )

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I agree wuth Richard: I do not think we can calculate exactly how many days each of us will be working, but if we keep it on an egalitarian basis for the moment and also include some mechanism to check people's work at some deadlines and withhold payments, etc. it should work.

In the end successful projects are based on trust.

It is a myth that E-HELP is run on an egalitarian model. The range of money paid out and the number of days worked, per institution, is in fact fairly extreme. For example, it goes from 71,250 to 18,000 euros and 240 to 90 days.

Trust is indeed needed but you must have a structure to back this up. I attended a meeting on Comenius Projects in London a couple of years ago. This included a talk from a man whose job it was to “inspect” Comenius Projects. He claimed that the main reason why projects are not completed is because of bad feeling caused by the belief that some members were not contributing enough. This obviously causes demotivation and a decrease in the work being performed by the more active members. He argued that the best way to deal with this problem is to make it clear what each member is signing-up for. This allows members to control their level of commitment. Members can argue that they want to contribute 15 to 250 days to the project. Andy and I will try to do what we can to satisfy your needs. However, it must be remembered that members of the project have to provide time-sheets concerning their days worked.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Interests:Ph.D. in Philosophy (History and Geography), Universidad Autónoma, Madrid, 1994 <br />I am Head of Department of Geography and History in IES Parque de Lisboa, a secondary school in Alcorcón, Madrid.<br />Last years my interests have been focused on:<br />Using the internet and ICT in teaching late modern history<br />Participating and coordinating international collaborative projects in the EU (Comenius), in the US (Fulbright) and Japan (Japanese Foundation Study Tour).<br />Developing strategies for teaching history and geography through a foreign language (English) in a Spanish speaking context.

I calculate 120 days as well, so it will make 120x150=18.00. Just as it is in EHELP-

The point is that at my school Ramón Burgaleta is a very active member and has been, is and will be involved in producing materials all over E-HELP Project. As he has very young children, he has serious difficulties in attending to the meetings.

He is willing to do the same in our future project. I think that it will be fair that in our institution case staff costs and work days were like that:

Juan Carlos Ocaña 120x150=18.000

Ramón Burgaleta 120x150=18.000

At the same time, I do think that we have establish some clear criteria about performance, products, deadlines and, in case that any institution do not fulfill its obligations the way that money will be withhold.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

At Swedish universities we automatically get 200 hours/term for 'competence development'. I'll look into the possibility of Niklas and I being able to use some of these hours each term for participation in the project. If (as I strongly suspect) this is OK, our participation will be largely 'funded' by Kalmar (in the cockeyed way that accountants work). (This is how I participated in Gothenburg, by the way.)

You need to put in a bid for days per institution. It is of course possible to have more than one person to supply these days. For example, Juan Carlos’ institution plans to do this. The lead institution is also likely to involve more than one person (the head and someone else for administration). There is nothing stopping you for funding the sending of an extra person from your institution to our meetings.

As regards workloads, etc, I feel that we should develop our ability to meet virtually (as I've said elsewhere). If we can have an hour-long meeting each month, to review progress, and if we are very clear about what is to be done, by whom and when, then there's a very good chance that we'll get into a virtuous circle of working together, and the people who do more won't become irritated by the people who do less (and vice versa!). In a situation like this, payment for work done, rather than a standard sum, irrespective of what gets done, is likely to be more acceptable to everyone.

I agree that having a monthly video conference is a good idea. Maybe we should put this in our application.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

This is something new for me, because I've never been payed to participate in a european project. Usually the projects paid me the travel expenses and some Learning Objects I made. So, I have some questions about how this will be possible in my school.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Although probably is not the fairest way (institutions will get the same amount of money, even though their different perfomance), I put myself in John and Andy's shoes and I think that the egalitarian approach is the easiest to budget. Bearing in mind our salaries, calculate a number of days of work so that everybody get the same amount of money.

I would rather support a centralised financial management of the project. Delegation can lead to more burocracy and red tape.

Sorry for chiming in late in this thread. Nevertheless, I cannot but agree with Carlos's proposal but I must let you know that I have very little experience in such projects. :-(

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

It is a myth that E-HELP is run on an egalitarian model. The range of money paid out and the number of days worked, per institution, is in fact fairly extreme. For example, it goes from 71,250 to 18,000 euros and 240 to 90 days.

In fact the range of payments in e-Help varies from about 30,000 to 12,000 Euros. The figure of 71,248 Euros includes the 45,648.03 Euros that the IST contributes to the project. The number of days dedicated to the project is a contrived number to make sure everyone still gets paid the same even though real staff costs vary from 140 Euros a day, to 387 Euros a day.

The Coordinating institution in fact receives a little less than 30,000. It was agreed in the preliminary meeting (before the IST took on coordination) and is common practice that the coordinator dedicates twice as many days as any other individual to the project. In addition, you have to employ someone that can manage a financial system that meets strict EU guidelines for analytical accountancy. The IST also hosts three of the seven meetings.

All other institutions receive exactly the same amount irrespective of the real work that they do ie 11,500 Euros. The only exception to this are institutions which host planning meetings. They receive an extra 1000 Euros.